Najam Joins Discussion on COP30 and the Future of Climate Action for BBC World Service
On Monday, November 24, 2025, Professor Adil Najam, global President of WWF and the inaugural Dean Emeritus and Professor of International Relations and Earth and Environment at the Pardee School, spoke to The Climate Question podcast, a series by BBC World Service. He was joined by David Victor, Distinguished Professor of Innovation and Public Policy at the University of California, and Dr. Musonda Mumba, Secretary General of the Convention on Wetlands, to reflect on the recent COP30 (Conference of the Parties) climate summit in Brazil and discuss the future of climate action. This yearly discussion was moderated by The Climate Question host, Graihagh Jackson.
Many walked away from COP30 feeling underwhelmed and uncertain of its effectiveness. BBC Climate Editor, Justin Rowlatt, shared that many of the agreements echoed those from previous years. Priorities such as lowering global temperatures and transitioning away from fossil fuels were reiterated, but little new agreements were made. This year, the United States was notably absent, leaving space for other countries to step up as leadership. When asked about this potential, Adil observed,
China is the obvious country that comes to mind, but so does the EU and the Europeans, and they were absent in leadership…. And China remains silent. In a way it assumes that it is the new leader, but in forum after forum, what we see is that it has kind of not ready to come out and claim that leadership, and certainly was not doing that at Belém. But I think the real tragedy and the missed opportunity was that once again the Europeans demonstrated that they are not ready for environmental and climate leadership either.
There was also an absence of any mention of fossil fuels in the documents, which confused and surprised many countries. Mumba and Victor agreed that the lack of a unified direction to go towards overcoming these obstacles is evidence of disconnection between countries and a need for leadership. Adil pointed out that countries, such as China and India, have made transitions from fossil fuels difficult. They are not oil producers themselves, but consumers. Adil questioned the ability for poor countries to enact these transitions,
There needs to be very clear language on the transition to fossil fuel. But in terms of this agreement, the word to look at is ‘just transition’…. How can you make this happen when you are not allowing for a just transition, a transition away from fossil fuel, for those who have not had anything to do, or very little to do, with creating the problem. So here we do have a complicated situation in the sense that what is at stake is also what happens to the future of the COPs themselves. If all of us are agreeing that this was either a failure or not much of a success, then what will take place instead of it, or in addition to this?
On light of this, policy makers and climate activists are searching for other solutions outside of the COP gatherings. Victor proposed that organizing smaller groups to work towards these efforts might be a feasible option. He also emphasized that some of the most notable success stories have been results from smaller groups in addition to technological change. Adil argued for the need to keep these larger groups intact,
I understand the logic and I understand that there has been a desire for it, but for the problems that are most central, especially to the developing countries, I think we do need the large-end multilateralism. This happens at a point when multilateralism is imploding all around us, not just at the COPs, but at the United Nations on its 80th anniversary, we are not sure if there will be an 81st. So these are troubling times for multilateralism in general. To the extent they can work, they already are working, so small groups can do things. But I do not think that they are an alternative for the large-end multilateralism that the COPs represented and that developing countries in particular were looking for.
When asked what he would do in order to accelerate climate action, Adil said as his closing remarks, “I would try to make the COPs more effective. I would come back and try to push them to come back to their original mission. In some ways, they’ve expanded their agenda too much to local action and domestic action. All of that can be encouraged by the COPs, but their primary purpose is international agreement.”
To watch the full episode and discussion, click here.
Adil Najam is the dean emeritus at the Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies and the professor of international relations and of earth and environment. An authority on climate action and South Asian politics, he has taught at MIT and Tufts University and is currently serving as the president of WWF International. He was a visiting fellow at the University of Oxford’s Wolfson College and was named the first De Janosi Fellow at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) in Austria. A prolific writer, Najam has authored more than 100 academic papers and published eight books including South Asia 2060: Envisioning Regional Futures (2013) and How Immigrants Impact their Homelands (2013). To know more about his work and accomplishments, visit his faculty profile.